Forum Moderators: martinibuster
Is there a reason why adsense dont show us CPC?
it would be nicer, instead of having to divide earnings by clicks every time.
Looking at CPC only leaves out CTR, which as you know incrediBill is fairly important.
Personally, I find the eCPM stat very useful for comparing channels that get different amounts of traffic.
But ask yourself which looks best to most AdSense users, that big number in the eCPM column or an average CPC column?
They could've included both but nooooo....
I'm sure the avg. CPC was deliberately left out just to keep whining at a minimum.
1) eCPM lets you compare the performance of AdSense and other revenue sources (such as direct ad sales or affiliate commissions), and...
2) The earnings figure shows your bottom-line income.
Personally, I tap the earnings, clicks and impressions into a spreadsheet and it gives me all of the data I want to know. I don't really look at the Google stats other than to confirm my totals tally with theirs.
As you know, you can calculate average CPC by dividing total earnings by the number of clicks. Since CPC varies widely from ad to ad, however, it would not be possible to create a straight 'CPC' column. Some ads pay more than others.
In light of this, we feel eCPM is more useful because it gives you a relative idea of how your pages monetize. eCPM is even more useful when you use channels, because it shows you in comparable terms which ad units, pages, color schemes, etc. perform best on your pages.
Hope that explains a bit,
ASA
In light of this, we feel eCPM is more useful because it gives you a relative idea of how your pages monetize.
Further, there is no such thing as CPC (cost per click) for the publisher. It doesn’t cost me anything when someone clicks on an ad. EPC (earnings per click) certainly is relevant for a publisher, but as ASA noted, it is very easy to calculate.
As both EFV and ASA said, eCPM (earnings per 1,000 impressions) is my preferred method of judging the value of a program. It has been a primary method used for such purposes almost from the beginning of advertising on the Internet so we have a long history to benchmark against.
Sure it's not the actual cost of each click, but it just makes more sense to me than the eCPM.
I also calculate EPC, but it gives me an incomplete picture. Let say I had an EPC of US$1.00. Should I be happy or sad? If I had 5,000 impressions and only two clicks, even at an EPC of $1.00, I’d be sad. But eCPM give me better information to understand the general performance of the program because if factors in, not only EPC, but how many clicks I had and the number of impressions delivered.
It's maybe not as valuable as eCPM but an optional EPC column would save many people lots of time.
we feel eCPM is more useful because it gives you a relative idea of how your pages monetize
With all due respect to EFV and ASA, and this could be purely speculation, but it seems when smart pricing starts to kick in hard it's easier to spot when your avg. CPC drops to $0.15 or less compared to monitoring your eCPM.
Avg. CPC just seems easier to me than scanning the eCPM and then compare it to the CTR to determine if the channel is getting better CPC for the keywords than other channels. Just visually scanning the list seeing $14/$15 eCPM is kinda meaningless without taking CTR into account and avg CPC just cuts thru the chase.
Downloading a channel report into Excel just to generate avg. CPC is just annoying at best.
